nationfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Crystalbeastdeck09/State Reform 2011
This will be a major revolt from within. I'll stay tuned for more! 07:37, May 22, 2011 (UTC) :Pretty epic, indeed. The Master's Voice 07:47, May 22, 2011 (UTC) well i think it's pretty much done but i want those people who wanted the line of sucession to be changed write the article that would do that. Marcus/Michael Villanova 12:20, May 22, 2011 (UTC) ::What you mean: "write the article that would do that", should we edit this page? The Master's Voice 12:46, May 22, 2011 (UTC) No just re-write the article you don't like, post here in this talk page add i'll add it. Marcus/Michael Villanova 13:53, May 22, 2011 (UTC) :You mean on your Reform, right? The Master's Voice 13:56, May 22, 2011 (UTC) No on my pickle farm, what do you think? Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:07, May 22, 2011 (UTC) :Okay, add this: ::Article 1B - Changes about the kings power ::Section 5, 5.1, changes to just section 5 ::5. The King does not hold any extra power including a seat in congress, if a member of the family ::would like to be in congress they must be elected like any other citizen. ::6. The Lovian Line of Succession is expanded to include all direct descendents of Arthur I of Lovia including the sons of Arthur III, to be added behind the King's direct sibling(s) and possible future issue. ::7. The second in Line to the Throne in the L.o.S. (in this case: Alexander) is officialy declared the ::heir apparant and will thus succeed the Monarch if he either abdicates or dies without issue. :Those are the changes. Add it. The Master's Voice 14:19, May 22, 2011 (UTC) No. Those aren't clauses to add to a constitution. You should added clauses that are very general, not like "Arthur III"s sons are part of the line of succession". It should say, "all descendants of Arthur I are part of the line of succession. This way, we don't need to modify the constitution every time something like this comes up. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 17:13, May 22, 2011 (UTC) I see you three (MV,TM,and Horton) should continue to discuss this until then the clause won't be added. Marcus/Michael Villanova 17:17, May 22, 2011 (UTC) :@TM: Okay, let's do that and not get entangled into a pointless and needlessly long discussion once agian. The Master's Voice 17:27, May 22, 2011 (UTC) I'm going to make my on 2011 State Reform. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 17:31, May 22, 2011 (UTC) :@TM: Do as you please. @Marcus: It is settled now. Minus one sentence, it appears to be in order. The Master's Voice 17:38, May 22, 2011 (UTC) ::I'd like to add a clause saying the new King assumes the throne after presenting himself to the Congress on invitation of the people (50% of the Congress). This is to avoid disputes about who is the rightful heir. 05:38, May 23, 2011 (UTC) :::That sounds reasonable, yes. The Master's Voice 08:07, May 23, 2011 (UTC) Add it in where possible. Marcus/Michael Villanova 20:25, May 23, 2011 (UTC) :Done. Now the appointment of the successor is automatic but to get the title of King the heir must hold a speech in Congress (or just say 'hi folks I am your new monarch') 08:35, May 24, 2011 (UTC) Sounds Good Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:39, May 24, 2011 (UTC) :Sounds alright. First he has to give a sign of life before he takes the throne, so as not to select any unactive people to take over the role of King. The Master's Voice 19:24, May 24, 2011 (UTC)